Fatherhood—including now being “Papa” to my grandson, Emmett—has provided me with powerful testimony to a loving God who, in Christianity, reveals Himself as “Our Father.”
I shared this story about the first time I heard my then two-year-old son, Matthew, tell me he loved me and received this note from a friend:
“IMHO, you are probing, without saying so in so many words, a besetting issue in much of contemporary American reformed thinking — a reluctance to give wholehearted affirmation to the primacy of God as loving… many have adopted a formulation of election that logically compels them to say that God does not love every person equally, and on the same basis. Often, they protest otherwise, but still, there is equivocation… Do we take 1 John seriously? One of my earliest, pre-school age Sunday School memories is learning ‘God is love…’ Still works… [decades] later, God bless that teacher.”
My friend’s feedback brings up important questions we all wrestle with—either consciously or unconsciously—and ones that John, arguably Jesus closest earthly friend on earth, addressed as a pastor in his letter: What is the essence of God? What is God’s heart toward me? What is God’s heart toward those I love?
John said: “So we have come to know and to believe the love that God has for us. God is love, and whoever abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him.” (1 John 4:16)
“God is love” is a phrase that’s thrown around a lot in our day, yet one that’s rarely given clarity. Although I’ve come to believe that love is at the heart of God—something John is stating clearly here, I don’t believe it’s just a gooey pile of sweets we dole out to the masses.
Christian ministers need to faithfully represent God. Our job is to avoid false teaching, especially when it comes to God’s character. Regrettably, here is “a gooey pile of sweets” example of what a trustworthy shepherd of souls can’t do:
Desiring to accommodate her version of Christianity to our sexually permissive culture, Nadia Bolz-Weber, former founder and pastor of House for All Sinners and Saints in Denver, says, “I insist on this—when two loving individuals, two bearers of God’s image, are unified in an erotic embrace, there is space for something holy.” She then redefines holiness to mean the exact opposite of what it means, and detaches it completely from purity: “Purity most often leads to pride or despair, not holiness. Because holiness is about union with, and purity is about separation from.”[1]
Yeah right.
In Hebrew, holy means “set apart,” not “union with,”and is intimately connected with purity. Ms. Bolz-Weber may be inventive and know something of grace, but she shows herself to be a “hack” when it comes to handling the Bible and completely distorts the meaning of holy.
The late Donald Bloesch in his Essentials in Evangelical Theology gives a more accurate and helpful summary of how holiness relates to God’s love, as well how it does to impurity and all sin.
- “Holiness… [is] … separation from all that is unclean… and applies to God par excellence.”
- The encounter with… [a holy God] gives rises to a sense of one’s own unworthiness as well as… [an overwhelming] sense of the majesty of God (cf. Isa. 6:1-5).”
- “God can only be approached via a Mediator whose righteousness is acceptable to divine holiness, namely, Jesus Christ.”
- ***“The love that comes from God accepts the sinner as he is, in his sins, but because it is also a holy love, it demands that the sinner change his ways.”[2]
Again, Donald Bloesch helps us get it right with this great theologically precise definition:
“God in his essence is both love and holiness, and therefore it is of a holy love that we must speak when referring to divinity. God is love, but his love exists in tension with his holiness. There is both a kindness and a severity in God (Romans 11:22), and neither must be emphasized to the detriment of the other. God’s steadfast love endures forever (Psalm 136:1; 138:8), but it endures as a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:28-29).”[3]
-Donald Bloesch
Regarding how God’s love endures like a “consuming fire,” let’s look at the context of Hebrews 12:28-29: “Therefore let us be grateful for receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, and thus let us offer to God acceptable worship, with reverence and awe, for our God is a consuming fire.”
“Reverence and awe” is a corollary to the phrase “the fear of the LORD” (e.g. Proverbs 1:7) and is an appropriate response to God’s majesty and supremacy over all things. And, yes, like a “consuming fire” or lightning or electricity, God is dangerous but he is not capricious or mean-spirited.
No, God really is love; indeed, the essence of God is holy love.
But how does God’s wrath fit into all of this? We’ll address this widely misunderstood and important topic next week. Enjoy your day!
[1] Nadia Bolz-Weber, Shameless (New York: Convergent, 2019), 20,26.
[2] Donald Bloesch, Essentials in Evangelical Theology (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2006), 32-33. Words added in brackets, mine.
[3] Ibid.